I notice a few interesting things, such as the fact that they cannot gain bonus spells for wisdom. A very interesting development, probably done to balance it with the spontaneous casting. I also like how mystics can't be the tanks that clerics can (since they don't have the armour that clerics do).
I also find extremely interesting that the only class skills that require wisdom are Heal (Wis) and Profession (Wis). It is still important for spell DC, and how many spells they can cast per day, but it isn't nearly as important as it is for clerics. I'm almost tempted to make Constitution the stat that determines how many spells they could cast per day and the DC of that spell (since you are drawing on your own life energy) which would give them much different personality from the cleric. Of course, given that mystics were cleric replacements, that wouldn't necessarily work with Dragonlance canon.
I love the influence of Chaos thing, where the WoHS aren't explained as being a bunch of crazed psychopaths, but just supplanted the scions... which I can certainly see. After all, there are many benefits to everybody by having an organized college of wizardry.
I notice as well that the "Scions" are no longer just dwarves, but are the generic term for hybrid divine/arcane spellcasters in Krynn's past. I wonder if there is going to a new class for them in an "Age of Dreams" sourcebook, or whether they will simply have the "mystic theurge" prestige class.
The whole "no/few skills that use the class's primary ability score" thing also isn't unique to the mystic. The sorcerer doesn't have -any- Cha-based skills! For people who don't have to keep their heads buried in books, you'd think that tthey would get out a little more. ;)
I'm also not so sure about making Constitution the primary ability score. While I see what you're getting at, I think it's not exactly an accurate statement, as the mystics drew on personal, inner strength (as represented by self-knowledge which lumps into the Wisdom score) instead of any physical strength or fortitude.
And the use of "Scion" came off more to me as just a general application to describe any user of ambient magic during the Second Age. No, no, my friend. Let's not limit the mystic theurge to the Second Age. ;)
I noticed the goof about the spells "per day" thing on a second re-read. My bad.
I see your point on the mystic for Dragonlance, and where there power comes from. Constitution could work though if someone was to steal this class for another setting. Of course, that means that Constitution might be too powerful, since you get HP for it to. That means you get rewarded twice. A fighter, for example, is good at hitting things, and thus you give it strength. By making constitution the centerpeice of spellpower, you give them spellpower, and the ability to soak damage.
As for the Scion, I was just wondering whether that meant that it would simply be an alternate name for the "mystic theurge" rather than limiting the prestige class to the age of dreams. It would be interesting though to see a core class that combines divine/arcane magic. For someone wanting to that earlier, Monte Cooke's Arcana Unearthed spell system doesn't divide between divine and arcane spells. Thus, all four of his spellcasting classes would probably work for "Scion" variants.
I have to say I'm not disappointed on how they worked out the mystic at all
In the long run, I would like to see a Core Player's Handbook Mystic when 4th edition comes out (4-5 years?)! And if the Noble plays out well, WotC might stick that in too!
Originally posted by Saurus Prime
As a DM, I'd allow a Mystic in any setting, and I find it frustrating that this is the first time a heroic nobility PC class has been out. (Who's the kings for all these places, Fighters and Wizards?!)
This isn't the first time we've seen a noble from WotC (Star Wars, Wheel of Time), but it is the first time we've seen a D&D version.
It took me a bit to warm up to the concept, but once I thought about it, I realized that this was a perfect class for DL. You can be an elven noble, minotaur, dwarf, a Palanthan or Solamnic noble...
The list goes on and on. I just wonder what a kender noble would be like! ;)
In the long run, I would like to see a Core Player's Handbook Mystic when 4th edition comes out (4-5 years?)! And if the Noble plays out well, WotC might stick that in too!
I think both classes would be fantastic for other settings. If I run a non-DL D&D game sometime, I may stick those classes in.
Originally posted by Dragonhelm
.
a Palanthan or Solamnic noble...
I just want to know the difference between the two! ;)
A noble will probably be most useful pre-5th age as the bardic replacement... you know the people influencing party member. The "only at 1st level" thing is pretty silly though. I don't see why you couldn't get knighted and start doing noble things. The character of Tol from the new Ergoth Trilogy is a perfect example of a fighter who gains a couple levels in the Noble class.
I heard an interesting veiwpoint about the bard and the ranger this morning from a friend of mine, who read it online somewhere. Basically it says that bards and rangers don't actually cast spells, but rather the spells are simply a mechanic for what they are actually doing. Like when a bard casts augury he isn't doing mystic chanting, he is just ruminating over an ancient prophecy he heard and how it reflects the current situation. I think that has a lot of dragonlance flavour.
I got a couple people to check over the mysti, and there is some concern that it may be underpowered, given that there are no cleric spells that you really need to cast over and over with the exception of the healing spells. I don't think so myself, but I'll only know for sure when I play my Seeker Preist.